“… businesses want answers right away and many times high statistical reliability is not worth the cost it takes to achieve it.

Insights that point decision-makers to go “left” or “right” is innately good enough. Leaders are oftentimes not willing to pay for “turn left at a 30 degree angle” or “turn right at an 115 degree angle” because it may cost too much money and takes far too long to obtain those precise next steps through drawn-out methodologies.”

—–

Kuhn

==================

“Every great advance in science has issued from a new audacity of imagination.”

=

John Dewey

==============

“Perfect numbers like perfect men are very rare.”

—–

Rene Descartes

============

This is about how ROI gets abused in decision making.

While this is about business what made me think about this is how the Trump administration typically discusses budgets with “we made cuts where there was no evidence of appropriate results” justifications.

Some of those justifications are terrifying.

Some of their choices are terrifying.

Shit. As one writer put it … “the math is terrifying.”

Well. I am going to let other people tear apart the incredibly short sighted Trump budget plans <which, yes, has scraps of good ideas> and I will focus on the criteria it appears they focused on — budget by ROI.

Budgeting by ROI.

Whew. The Trump administration is simply in my cross hairs at the moment, but this topic provides me with another excuse to blast my generation of business leaders and how their misguided thinking has screwed up not only how business is conducted, in general, but how we think about business.

Specifically on ROI, these hollow men hollowed out business of any of the ‘art’ and color which is associated with thriving businesses which contribute to society & cultural norms leaving at an empty husk of dollars & cents and black & white ROI decisions.

————–

ROI.

ROI <return on investment> is a fabulous tool. It offers us every day unimaginative pragmatic schmucks an almost heuristic way to judge some fairly complex and complicated things in business.

But old white men hollowed ROI of anything intangible and along the way scraped away some of the most meaningful things associated with investment in their desire for simplistic “this led to that.” Certainly some investments have linear outcomes and results. But not all. And these hollow men in their black & white pursuit of profit, efficiency and outcomes became color blind. Old white men started looking at people as equal to numbers & dollars and not organic organisms of less than linear productivity <in terms of Life actualization as well as business actualization>. These hollow men fell in love with numbers and began diminishing the value of humanity.

—————-

………. hollow men making hollow decisions ……

Look. I am all for analysis and love quantitatively judging tactics and initiatives. But I also understand that <1> numbers often do not always tell the entire story and <2> we far too often judge ROI on one specific outcome without assessing some value on some ‘ripple effect’ outcomes.

But, first, the numbers and ROI. I once wrote numbers have lost their mojo and, yes, I still believe that … just in a different context. In this case we are dealing with a generation of business people who have completely bastardized the use of numbers – stripping them of anything but the false veneer of what they call “simplistic stark truth.”

Now. ‘Simplistic stark truth’ sounds good … and it sounds really good in the business world. And, yet, in this starkness there is found falseness. The falseness can be found in its lack of imagination, its lack of depth and its lack of seeing anything but ‘what can be measured.’

This stupid view of numbers wreaks havoc when viewing ROI analysis.

Well. I could argue this all happened because ROI analysis permitted a shortcut for business people — a thinking & decision making shortcut. It permitted, and encouraged, an entire generation to not have to really think but rather fallback on “that’s what the analysis said.”

That is plain and simple lazy fucking business <not smart solid business>.

I will not argue that a good ROI analysis can offer a quick spontaneous glimpse of truth viable snapshot, in fact, it was Ralph Waldo Emerson who stated that the growth of intellect is spontaneous.

Of course, he hadn’t been bludgeoned with measurement, ROI and data driven decisions.

Of course, he was also on the one who stated … what is the hardest task in the world? To think. And. We are all wise. The difference between persons is not in wisdom but in art.

And that is where this ‘budgeting by ROI’ is most aggravating.

It is not that they cannot envision the art of decision making but rather they purposefully abstain from the art of decision making <and focus solely on ROI>.

It is not that they are oblivious to the qualitative nature & benefits of budgetary decision but rather they avoid the more difficult defense of the qualitative to utilize the more easy, and lazy, rationale of the quantitative.

All that said. While ROI seems a straightforward way to analyze, ROI, when evaluated properly, can be devilishly tricky. But. When done well it can inform some great insightful decisions and ideas.

ROI, when evaluated properly, can be devilishly painful … like having the devil screaming at you type painful … and even when done well tends to dull <not sharpen> the good ideas.

==============

“The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.”

F. Scott Fitzgerald

==============

But ROI, measurement … practical rewards & output … that is what we ‘do’ these days. This seem to be our “how we conduct business handbook” these days.

We seem to have forgotten the value of unsought discovery and the value of … well … the benefit of the benefit <I spent money which created ‘x’ outcome … which enabled this other ‘x’ outcome>.

We seem to have culturally decided consciously to … “inevitably we will show a failure of imagination.”

What do I mean ? Let me use a quote from Le Carre’s Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy:

“…in the hands of politicians grand designs achieve nothing but new forms of the old misery…”

In our failure of imagination in our analysis of existing programs and initiatives we come up with grand designs begetting new forms of old misery. Which brings me back to Trump & his administration. These are supposed to be fucking business people and not politicians in place making these ‘grand designs.’

I admit.

I am wary of how ‘we the people’ will move forward with regard to budgeting and programs and policies and deciding what we should do to better America.

I am wary because I see little moving forward, no ‘trying to do what it takes to get there’ other than bludgeoning people with simplistic harsh solutions and no imagination to overcome the cries of ‘why waste money on something like this!”

I am wary because I see men of a generation who bastardized ROI analysis applying their own bastardized version of ROI thinking to people’s lives <under the guise of “applying it to people’s money/taxes” — no, they are not the same>.

I am a business guy.

I cannot envision running a business, or a government, without solid measurement, ROI & budgeting rigor. But I also know from running a business with hundreds of employees that the greatness of an organization does not reside solely in some number or some ROI analysis.

==========

“The true greatness of a nation is not measured by the vastness of its territory, or by the multitude of its people, or by the profusion of its exports and imports; but by the extent to which it has contributed to the life and thought and progress of the world.

===============

I tend to believe most of us every day schmucks recognize that ROI is part of doing business and insuring our hard earned money/taxes is used effectively. But I also believe that most of us every day schmucks also realize that some things just cannot be measured solely by numbers.

I worry that this Trump administration is reflective of the lost art of ROI analysis and the value of discovery

In their love of money as ‘winning’ they have lost sight of the value of seeking what is beyond the horizon. They have devalued imagination to such a point that they most likely define imagination as measurable in an ROI analysis. In other words they take ideas and thoughts, even ones with no history, and embrace them not by saying “what if” and “what could be” but rather by grinding it through some veg-o-matic ROI machine to assess its true value.

And that, my friends, while I am bashing the Trump administration, is actually how far to many businesses build their budgets.

And that, my friends, is not how America does business nor should any business … because it shows a failure of imagination and it is imagination, not ROI analysis, which drives real change and progress.

—————–

“Imagination has brought mankind through the dark ages to its present state of civilization.

Imagination led Columbus to discover America. Imagination led Franklin to discover electricity. Imagination has given us the steam engine, the telephone, the talking-machine, and the automobile, for these things had to be dreamed of before they became realities. So I believe that dreams–daydreams, you know, with your eyes wide open and your brain machinery whizzing–are likely to lead to the betterment of the world.

The imaginative child will become the imaginative man or woman most apt to invent, and therefore to foster, civilization.”

“Your mind is not a cage. It’s a garden. And it requires cultivating.”

=

A Great and Terrible Beauty by Libba Bray

—

“What did thinking ever do for me; to what great place did thinking ever bring me?

I think and think and think.

I’ve thought myself out of happiness one million times, but never once into it.”

=

extremely loud and incredibly close

—

This is a long rambling piece on thinking.

Ok. While often we talk about Time as the new currency in people’s lives, I think we should more often discussing Thinking as the new form of Life currency. Yup. Thinking as a value proposition.

In today’s complex business world it seems like we are increasingly dependent upon thinking work, creativity, and the ability to grasp and apply complex abstract multi-dimensional intellectual challenges. To be clear, thinking work is different from the traditional jobs & work of even the last generation. I am not suggesting past work generations didn’t think, but in an output/creation economy a worker could measure their success in physical quantities – how much stuff was created, sold, shipped or built.

Now. In an idea/thinking economy the measures of success are increasingly intangible <unless you deem profits & stock price as tangible>. In this type of less tangible value proposition all of a sudden ideas or ‘feelings’ create value.

Examples:

==

The iPod was better than other MP3 players not because it had more, but because it had fewer buttons and features – the right buttons and features for music on the go.

—

A restaurant chain displaces a competitor because it feels more (or less) like home.

—

A shoe company thrives because it gives away half the pairs that you buy.Even vacuum cleaners, cars, and backyard grills are made, marketed and sold in ways that were inconceivable in the past.

==

Producing these products and services, consequently, is less a function of the volume of resources that are put in and more a function of “thinking investment” & “creating perceptions <with value>.” In the past more raw materials, better equipment, or people punching a time clock translated directly to more “output.”

Today, value creation is often more about efficiency.

Or minimizing to maximize.

Minimize what to put in and then maximize how creatively you craft the features.

This means that production in today’s business world is about economical/efficient input … and selling is about effectiveness <value creation thru thoughtful ideation>.

That means thinking is the foundation of today’s economy value creation.

Yikes. Yikes because thinking ain’t easy. In fact there is an inherent frailty in the intangible of this thinking foundation.

Frailty? Yup. A couple of frail aspects to this thinking world I am outlining.

There is a mental frailty when it comes to coming up an ‘idea’ <good ideas are tough to come up with and typically very personal> … and there is a positioning in the mind frailty because the value resides more in ‘thought’ than in anything real <kind of nebulous when in thought form> … and then there is a simple ‘space’ frailty in the thinking mind. Good ideas are often quick to arise and quick to die. Ideas , and consequently thinking, is scary.

While I am not particularly fond of the articulation of this creative execution the message is truer than true.

Ideas are scary. This leads me to the last frailty: a frailty in the mind’s capabilities. This frailty is reflected in sheer mind storage space available <or the lack thereof>.

It’s not that there is any decline in mental capabilities but rather the mind becomes overwhelmed with too much thinking. By the way, this is not information overload, that is a different issue, this is simply thinking too much. Too much thinking when the mind would be at its best by … well … not thinking.

Too much thinking can kill inspiration <as all the reasons why it can’t be done arise>.

Too much thinking can kill a thought <as it gets overwhelmed by new thoughts>.

Too much thinking can kill an idea <shifting from good to mediocrity>.

===

“It is a fundamental paradox of human psychology that thinking can be bad for us.”

Ian Leslie

===

By following our own thoughts too closely we can lose our bearings as our inner chatter drowns out common sense and stifles our ‘good thinking’. Most of us are actually really pretty good at naturally stripping away unimportant to what is important when we think. Unfortunately we also suck at stopping after stripping.

What I do know for sure is that in a study of shopping behavior the less information people were given about a brand the better choice they made. Specifically <and this will matter to those marketers who like to give gobs of minutiae to people believing it will help them make a better choice> … when offered full ingredient details the consumer got confused by their options <unable to discern differences and importance> and actually ended up choosing a product they did not like <i.e., people were forcing themselves to select on a criteria that was not really ‘heart preference’ but rather “head <logical> preference.” And they were not happy in the end when they used.

Sometimes the mind gets overwhelmed if it has to think about too much.

This leads me to believing that the art of thinking needs to be nurtured and trained as well as possible to be successful in today’s world. Everyone has a natural thinker within us.

I believe everyone has some innate ability to treat pieces of information as jigsaw puzzle pieces waiting to be put together and create something. But within that innate ability there are some people who seem to slow down rapidly moving pieces mentally so they can see everything and, conversely, there are other people who only see blurs or pieces of the pieces. But everyone, yes everyone, has some ability to sift through the jumbled pot of information and, like a Williams Sonoma colander, trap the essentials and quickly let the inessential run off.

Yes. Thinking has always been about bringing stuff in and letting stuff out.

—

“… we are cups, constantly and quietly

being filled. the trick is knowing how

to tip ourselves over and let the

beautiful stuff out.”

Ray Bradbury

===

Even all that said … today’s world does demand a different type of thinker.

—-

The Thinker

Historically we contemplated in retreat, silence, solitude, and within our own mind. We solved problems in isolation, deep thought, and through introverted reflection.

==

The Contemporary Thinker

In an age of twittering, blogging, social networking, and sophisticated work-place networks, global science networks, and mass-participation and collaboration, information is exchanged in a nonstop connected world.

—–

Today’s thinking and problem solving has to live in a world where we are inter-connected, globally accessible and the exchange of information is fluid. This actually means we have the ability to bring problems closer to solutions and ideas faster to challenge the status quo.

So. Part of the challenge for the next generation of thinkers is how to let stuff out before they simply get overwhelmed with the amount that they bring in. This also means building a stronger ability to immerse in knowledge and then step out of immersion to think.

Uh oh. The stepping in and out is … well … difficult. Even for those who are good at it. In today’s digital/networked society where the world, cultures and people share their experiences via a variety of web based social platforms … information travels, it is fluid, and experiences are shared … meaning that ideas swirl around for thinkers to grab out of the ether <as long as they are paying attention>.

—-

“If you don’t think, then you shouldn’t talk.”

March Hare, Alice in Wonderland

========

“Half the world is composed of people who have something to say and can’t, and the other half who have nothing to say and keep on saying it.”

Robert Frost

———–

Thinking is complex <so trying to tell someone ‘how to think’ seems kind of silly>. But thinking encompasses being creative, thoughtful, and solutions oriented <for thinking without a conclusion isn’t really thinking>. And this thinking is being done in a world where problems are extremely complex, target expectations, markets and industry variables are continuously moving, and our brains often seem like small computers within enormous networks that are constantly reconfiguring.

Well. Let me tell you one last aspect which makes thinking even more difficult <and scary>. Let’s just say most of us every day schmucks, & businesses, are notorious for being future blind.

Why? Well.I am sure there are a variety of reasons, but I would suggest two main reasons:

it is difficult to envision something that doesn’t really exist today, and

we think about insights, the things that inspire true thinking, as the outcome … not the enabler for outcome.

Many years of innovation work have shown me that insights are not enough. In fact, they are fairly worthless on their own. Insights have little intrinsic value without being transformed into frameworks and narratives that can drive strategic action.

–

The best part is when you realize the value is not in the insight itself but what can be done with it. A good insight can inspire unique frameworks, narratives, and actions appropriate for very different challenges and opportunities.

==

I included that insight thought because I sometimes believe that thinking is hard because we love outcomes so much. Often insight is simply the enabler of an eventual outcome <therefore thinking only indirectly has an outcome>. And insights are not all created equal therefore not all outcomes are created equal.

<yikes … there is a nasty Life formula>

Look. All I really know is that today’s world runs on thinking <not making shit> and that thinking is not a particularly valued ‘product’ in today’s world.

We synthesize new ideas constantly.

We tend to learn rapidly.

Yeah. Don’t shake your head and disagree. Most people learn a lot of new stuff really fast.

Uh oh. While we learn, and think, and apply what we just learned … you make mistakes.

Yikes. Mistakes are tough to handle. We know we need to make them but get crucified in real life <and in business> and by society in making them.

This association makes thinking a disease in some people’s minds.

Think too much and bad shit happens.

Think too much and you get terminally ill.

—-

“Thinking has become a disease.”

Eckhart Tolle

—-

“The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority.

The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority.

The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking.”

A. A. Milne

—————

Well. Thinking can be a disease to some … and improve health in others. Suffice it to say the mind is an amazing instrument when used correctly and a very destructive weapon when used incorrectly. While the mind thrives when dealing with problems it also loves true thinking — thinking driven by you <not a problem>.

This type of thinking is difficult and, frankly, most people don’t like doing it.

“A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.”

—-

Winston Churchill

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“Men will defend most passionately, that which they doubt the most.”

——

Frank Herbert

====

Well. I admit. I try to avoid fanatics. I realize in doing so I am doing so at the expense of debate & discussion. I say this as someone who has dedicated an entire site to enlightened conflict and actually believing positive conflict leads to sparks of knowledge and learning. But fanatics are maddening to debate with. The debate, the intellectual conflict, becomes anything but intellectual or enlightening and the only sparks that occur tend to be ones of frustration. Specifically, they are maddening for two reasons:

Generalities not specifics

More often than not there is a broad sweeping generalization or claim grounded on ‘common sense.’ Debates are dependent upon specifics. Debating generalities is like swatting at clouds <that is maddening>. Beyond generalities the main constructive base for formulating the opinion is … well … common sense, i.e., “just think about it … its common sense when you look at it!”

This is maddening because how the hell do you debate common sense that is anything but common or of any sense?

More often than not a fanatic uses one, maybe two, narrow well-honed factoids. They are stilts upon which the fanaticism balances itself. This is maddening for two reasons:

<1> the factoid is, well, yes, a fact — but selective truth at best. It is a fact selected from a larger group of facts. So it may actually be the truth, but not the whole truth;

<2> whole truth is rarely easy to explain. Truth, in general, is rarely simple. Stilts are simple. Enough said on why that is maddening.

Regardless.

You can tell when you have run into a fanatic because there arrives a point where it is counterproductive to further discuss a topic. Simplistically, that point is when one person crosses into fanaticism. It is typically at this point when a mind closes.

And when the mind closes being right matters more than actual truth.

And when the mind closes there is actually no chance for a rational discussion because you actually cannot even agree to disagree. There is no agreement.

This is because a fanatic must be right and, therefore, if they are right than everyone who disagrees must be wrong.

This is maddening.

I am not sure this last thought is a reflection of a closed mind or simply a stubborn fanatical belief, but with most fanatics their position and belief becomes who they are … a strong aspect of their self-identity.

Even worse? It is an aspect of not only their identity but also their self-worth. Think about that for a second.

In your attempt to get a fanatic to change their position you are actually attempting to undo who they are as well as their sense of worth. Think about that the next time you gnash your teeth over a stubborn fanatic.

Suffice it to say, a closed mind is a bad thing.

Here is my hope when dealing with a fanatic. Sometimes, yes, sometimes … you can say something that has been said a zillion times before and somehow that ‘something’ reveals a new truth. By the way, this is more often than not not a simple truth or factoid, it is more often you stumbling across the moment in their past <or creating a visceral mental tie to that moment> that was actually the foundation for the fanaticism. Somehow you reveal a thought that reminds the person of a thought long misplaced or forgotten which ultimately creates ‘something’ which begins the unraveling of the whole foundation of the fanaticism.

My real point here is that the ‘something’ more often than not does not address the superficial surface fanaticism but instead addresses an underlying underpinning.

Please note the key word I used above – ‘stumble’. You can pick away at memories and try to reveal the ‘tipping moment’ in their thinking but more often than not you just stumble across it … uh oh … at the right time. Yeah. Timing matters too <and you never know about the timing>.

Anyway.

Fanatics are not just maddening but they can also be a little frightening.

===

“Human beings are perhaps never more frightening than when they are convinced beyond doubt that they are right.”

Laurens Van der Post

===

Now. Let me be clear about fanatics. Because some of the things I have written may suggest that these are all people wearing tin foil hates living in their parents’ basement reading up on the Illuminati.

That is not true. I would be willing to bet we all know fanatics. It can be someone you know well, even like most of the time, except for that “one topic.” The one topic for which they reach into their pocket and pull out their fanatic hat and put it on.

Here is where I give fanatics a break. The path I am suggesting is a trying, difficult path that takes a lot of work.

I am a curiosity guy and I walk a curious path. I believe … no … I know that there will always be something yet to be known that can significantly later or even completely undo everything we, or I, know and believe.

In fact … my Life is almost an ongoing quest to learn whatever I can to unlearn everything I know. And, yet, I am confident in my beliefs so that positively impacts how I live my Life and conduct myself. In other words, while confident in my beliefs I am not defined by them which permits me to constantly reexamine them in light of new information. I say all that because I know that the whole concept of ‘unlearning what you believe’ and ‘constantly seeking new knowledge with an eye to altering one’s beliefs’ is not an easy task.

It is easier to establish some beliefs and then move on to expanding the mind on a variety of other things. Let’s call this ‘closing parts of your mind’ rather than simply suggesting someone has a closed mind.

Life shrivels with someone who has a closed mind, but a partially closed mind permits enough growth to ignore the stagnant parts of the mind. Young people tend to be more receptive to the concept that there will always be some unknown fact just around the next proverbial corner that will turn some belief upside down. Older people tend to close off portions of their minds therefore eliminating differing opinions which could potentially alter something they hold true.

I believe <just my opinion> this happens because of the whole self-identity and self-worth thing I brought up earlier.

Young people are still growing into their identity and have shit for self-worth. They are trying out different thoughts and ideas like new clothes. Outgrowing some and ultimately wearing some until they fall apart.

Older people have some things that are ground into their identity & worth.

Anyway. Fanatics actually have an advantage over … well … me at least.

They stridently believe in something. That must be a comfort to them in Life.

I envy them their comfort.

And, yet, maddened by the fact they are so comfortable they won’t explore a different, maybe uncomfortable, thought.

Should we all believe in nothing? Of course not.

Life throughout history reveals the constant struggle between what we knew, what we know now and what will be known. It is a reflection of a constant struggle for truth which is a malleable concept even on a good day.

So most of us try and find truth when we can find it and as best as we can.

Fanatics don’t try.

Look. The challenge for all of us is to be careful how tightly we dogmatically cling to what we see as ‘the truth’ and how strongly we attack others’ truth. Heck. At any given point we might just both be right … or wrong.

Regardless.

Fanatics have lost that challenge. In fact, I am not sure they even recognize the challenge. I find that maddening. That is why I avoid fanatics.

“Show not what has been done, but what can be. How beautiful the world would be if there were a procedure for moving through labyrinths.”―

Umberto Eco

==============

“You are not going nowhere just because you haven’t gotten where you want to go yet.”

—-

Taylor Swift

====

So. Direction is one of the most stressful discussion in Life & in business. Where are you going? How are you planning on getting there? And, of course, are you sure that is the right direction?

Well.

I never thought I would ever use a Taylor Swift quote let alone use it to make a point.

I loved the quote. And it sparked me to thinking because if you think about it … not getting to where you want to be and nowhere … can look awfully similar.

But it is not.

Not even close.

The idea of “getting somewhere”, whether in your career, in Life, in personal change, in a relationship, in anything, sometimes seems to dominate our Life. This destination, this ‘thing’ we have envisioned in our mind, becomes sort of a measurement with regard to how we are effectively, or ineffectively, living our life. And in doing so if we are somewhere other than ‘there’ which may mean we simply just haven’t got there, yet, a lot of people suggest that means you are nowhere.

That is wrong. Very very <very> wrong.

We spends gobs of time and money trying to answer these questions. If you think about it while it may not sound completely absurd (defining direction insures you are at least not going somewhere completely useless) it can actually look like an incredibly poor investment with a dubious ROI.

It can be a stress on your everyday life.

It can be a burden.

It can create an absurdly long list of plans and things to do.

It can also translate into a lot of wasted time (because often where you decide to go isn’t exactly where you end up simply because Life’s terrain dictated a slightly better destination).

I sometimes think this is a reflection of what is wrong in today’s society – this belief if you haven’t achieved something you have achieved nothing.

Most of Life is a reflection of a shitload of journeys and paths and, well, a lot of walking, running, tripping and crawling. Because of that a shitload of people would suggest that most of your life you have been running in place <which sounds silly as I type it> or ‘wandering aimlessly <which also sounds silly as I type it because most times most people are wanting to get to where they want to be> and basically they are suggesting that, uhm, you have expended energy — and got nowhere.

99% of the time those people are just assholes.

Assholes who focus on destinations and not journeys. They only take satisfaction in highlighting specific milestones, objectives and outcomes achieved. They struggle to see the satisfaction in exploration, wandering and the journeys taken to the outcomes.

Look. I am not going to suggest achieving something, specifically, getting to where you want to be is not an admirable and useful objective. Because it is. Getting to where you want to be is aspirational and it implies you want to be better than what you are today. Being better and becoming better is something all of us should embrace.

But I will suggest that simply because you have not got there yet that you have gone nowhere.

In fact, I could argue that simply deciding where you want to be is somewhere.

In fact, doing something, even something small, is better than nothing and is something other than nowhere.

Anyway. You know what? it’s all exploration even if you don’t care about where you want to go. Why? You end up somewhere.

Here is the bottom line.

I would guess 90% of us are somewhere other than where we want to be. We may see glimpses of it and we may actually have touched it briefly, but most of us are still in the midst of getting there.

<to complete that equation I envision 5% don’t even try having given up and 5% believe they are there>

90% of us are certainly not ‘nowhere.’ We are simply works in progress trying to get somewhere better than who and what we are today. That means suggesting just because you haven’t got to where you wanted to be is ‘nowhere’ would mean that 90% of us are milling about in some wretched space of nothingness … and that is silly. Most of us are pretty happy and fairly content and typically thinking about being better.

There is a lesson here.

While I imagine Ms. Swift doesn’t philosophize on this thought like Umberto Eco, she has certainly embraced her responsibility & empowerment to communicate the right things to hordes of young people. And for that I applaud her. I do so not only because she is impacting young people’s minds in a good smart way but because there are a boatload of older people who have been gobsmacked into believing if you haven’t got to where you want to be that you are nowhere <and they do not hesitate to tell a shitload of people that>.

Embracing an ‘outcome is the most important’ Life philosophy is a slippery slope.

I would much rather we embrace a “just because you have not got to where you want to be does not necessarily mean you are nowhere” Life philosophy. You can embrace both but if you begin with the latter you are more likely to not only encourage the right behavior in people you will most likely encourage a more positive view of your own Life.

Lastly.

Okay. All this may sound rudderless. But 99% of the time while this discussion sounds, well, directionless, void of objective & absent of any ‘milestones’, it is none of those things. 99% of the time we have a sense of some destination, we just can’t really articulate it. Now. In a world that has an unhealthy relationship with measurement, achievement & “if it is intangible, can you make it tangible”, that ‘not able to articulate’ is a sonuvabitch to try and embrace.

I sometimes think that end of the end of this type of ‘going somewhere, just not sure where’journey the people who didn’t try to cram all the plans into the time and simply kept walking knowing they would get somewhere will absolutely find themselves some place better than where they started from and most likely end up somewhere good.

I will say Life can truly be a ‘wonderland’ if you don’t over think it. Sometimes the journey is an exploration and as long as you keep exploring the “somewhere” you get to is richer and, in the case of a business or an individual, maybe a stronger place. Maybe Life, and even business to some extent, is a time to wander.

To explore. To just see what you will see. And see what you will find.

Maybe this is time to remember Calvin & Hobbes: “Any road followed precisely to its end leads precisely nowhere.”

Maybe Alice in Wonderland, Umberto Eco & Taylor Swift and Calvin & Hobbes have the right idea. Nowhere may be a good destination objective.

“The measure of greatness in a scientific idea is the extent to which it stimulates thought and opens up new lines of research.”

=

Paul A.M. Dirac

——

“Half the money I spend on advertising is wasted; the trouble is I don’t know which half.”

=

John Wanamaker

–

—–

So. I thought about research, and brainstorming, the other day as I perused an article about a good friend of mine <and a gangbuster research group I would highly recommend –studyhall research: http://www.studyhallresearch.com/ > who was just named one of the top 20 research moderators in America.

Couple of thoughts hit me:

– I have a love/hate relationship with research <we tend to torture numbers & methodology to say what we want to say>.

So. Nifty thoughts <you may say> … but what the hell do these two thoughts have to do with each other? <other than the fact any viable business thinks or does both>

Well. Speaking of hell. Both are devils in their own way.

Research can be devilishly tricky <mostly because business people want to use it incorrectly> … but when done well … it can inform some great insightful decisions and idea.

Brainstorming can be devilishly painful — like visiting the devil at his home type painful and even when done well tends to dull <not sharpen> the good ideas.

I have seen both devils … have danced with both devils … and I would suggest you dance with the one you know the best <at least that’s what I say>.

I would choose to dance with research. No hesitation. Not just because I know it better, but it is better when done well, more cost effective and actually delivers an ROI.

Oh. And let me discuss ‘cost effective’ for a minute. Far <far> too many business leaders & managers suggest “brainstorming doesn’t cost us anything <and we gain value thru ‘involvement’>. Well. That value equation is so far <far> out of fucking wack I am not sure where to begin.

So let me begin with something safe.

Real costs. Like real tangible dollars & cents when addressing the ‘no cost’ theorem. Salary rates are always calculated on an out-of-pocket <what I actually have to pay someone in their paycheck>, overhead and margin model.

This is based on taking the direct salary cost and multiplying it by an overhead factor. The overhead factor is to cover the indirect salary costs such as healthcare/benefits, support staff like the receptionist and accounting and useless management, plus space rent and utility costs, IT and capital expenses.

This overhead factor can vary from 60% to 120% depending on a number of factors. Then you have to add to this cost the profit margin of anywhere from 10% to 25%. And then let’s figure your staff works a 1920 hour annual year <that’s 40 hours a week minus 2 weeks’ vacation and 2 weeks personal/health/whatever>. I won’t bore you with hourly rates per person I will shove into a brainstorming meeting which I will conservatively put in the ‘waste-of-time-thinking-session’ for 2 hours but lets just say you are going to end up dropping maybe $3 to $4,000 in non-billable or ‘producable’ wages on brainstorming.

There are so many ways and things you can spend $20000 in research <… and please … no one tell me zoomerang or survey monkey as viable ‘I will bank the future of my business’ research options> your head could explode exploring all of them.

Look. Good research is worth its weight in gold. Even better? It can actually generate ROI.

To be clear. Bad research is worthless <which is typically why I tell most businesses to not do their own research … and hire someone who knows their shit>.

Brainstorming has no ROI. Well. At least I can’t find one.

Good ideas get rejected because they are deemed too obvious <or not innovative or ‘breakthrough’ enough>. Whatever value <ROI> you gain in employee involvement & inclusion you tend to lose quickly with lack of results <i.e., simply waste of time as net employee response>.

Anyway.

Today’s business world is built differently than it used to be. We enter market more quickly <with less information>, move faster and adapt faster. This certainly takes a different kind of leadership & management skill set than many of us older folk learned in management. But more relevantly to what I am writing about today’s business world demands a different research vision that it used to be.

It needs to move faster and adapt faster. Long arduous research projects which are built to create “a solid foundation from which to carve out a space in the marketplace” <which is mostly bullshit anyway> are most often obsolete before you even get into market.

Why? That space, that window, is now closed. Research can’t measure static time & space <well … it actually can … but the information is practically useless because time & space doesn’t stand still nor repeat itself>. Research simply gives you a snapshot in the swirling seemingly chaotic space in which you are going to conduct your business.

“… businesses want answers right away and many times high statistical reliability is not worth the cost it takes to achieve it.”

and

“Insights that point decision-makers to go “left” or “right” is innately good enough. Leaders are oftentimes not willing to pay for “turn left at a 30 degree angle” or “turn right at an 115 degree angle” because it may cost too much money and takes far too long to obtain those precise next steps through drawn-out methodologies.

—

Well said.

More people need to be thinking is way.

Shit.

More research companies should be thinking his way.

Unfortunately not only do most people & companies disagree with me about the lack of value of brainstorming <and using that investment on research> but most senior people in business these days do not agree with ‘directional research.’ These business people do not want to be informed … they want decisions made <with research> for them … and then they use the research as ‘one lane highways to drive the company down.’

I am no research expert, but I know I don’t want to be dumb in bringing a business to market and I know I don’t want to be oblivious to thoughts & ideas that would make the business more likely to be successful initially. But I also know that being 80% close-to-being-right and in business making money <and adapting> is better than being 99% sure and being late to being in business <and being less likely to adapt because … well … shit … we are 99% sure aren’t we ?!?>.

Old school research thinking makes you late to market and encourages less flexible thinking and less adaptable behavior. You just get stuck in the old slow business people lane always getting passed by faster thinkers and adapters <shifters>.

Last two thoughts.

First. Don’t waste your money <or time> on brainstorming.

Second. If you are going to invest in research look for the adaptable directional research ROI.

I will end where I began … ‘the measure of greatness in a scientific idea is the extent to which it stimulates thought and opens up new lines of research.”

Great research not only informs <and does not make decisions> but it stimulates thought and inevitably opens up new lines of questions. Research can make sure you get some good basics right but it can also help you course correct and it can always make you think.

And in order to do that, you must first be willing to believe you have it.”

==

Audre Lorde

————

“There is always an easy solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.”

==

H. L. Mencken

———–

Well. This could be about either business or Life … but let me stick with business for today.

I have worked within so many industries and seen so many different businesses I can’t really keep them all straight. And maybe because of that breadth of experience I have realized that there is no formula for success that is easily transferable.

What this means in a practical sense is that I don’t have a formula to offer when I walk into a new business <because I would have to have dozens and my brain doesn’t work that way>. Yet, everyone, every business, seeks a formula for success. This can be frustrating <for the business and for me>. They do this despite the fact they know in their heart of hearts that most business situations are contextual and dipping into some past developed formula more likely than not is simply not going to replicate whatever had happened in the past that made the formula look so appealing.

And, yet, again and again … businesses seek some elusive formula to apply to their business – to start it, to make it more efficient or even on how to plan tactics.

Here is what I know from having walked through hundreds of business front doors. Business seems to demand order from its thinkers, doers and leaders.

Think about it. Inevitably no matter what conversation you are having … innovation, ideation, process, production or even organizational culture you will find yourself mired in some aspect of ‘order.’ And we wonder why there is so much angst and conflict in business? That is your explanation. The world is not a naturally orderly place and yet we constantly seek to put it in order.

Day in and day out almost everything a business does is about finding some order in a world that demands non order, non tidy, non linear, like thinking.

This is a crazy, sometimes stupefying, discussion of a desire for a winning formula … and a refusal to follow a formula at exactly the same time.

I cannot tell you how many times I have been pressed by a business to show proof that an idea, or something, has worked in the past … only to have another past ‘formula’ be rejected as ‘not relevant for us.’ Frankly, the inconsistency with regard to using something in the past is maybe the most consistent discussion I have in business.

Look. There are certainly some guiding principles that can help insure, or limit, your stupidity moving forward … but formulas don’t exist. What constantly still catches me a little off guard when formulas are being requested <or some derivative of a formula> is that we all know each business, each business situation and each organization is at minimum slightly unique.

Every relatively smart & experienced business person knows this. Therefore a past formula runs the risk of trying to put a square peg into a round hole.

Oh. But then we inevitably slide into the infamous discussion of “let’s just use the parts that apply to us & our situation.” This is another ‘formula but not-formula’ head scratcher.

Most past successes are a confluence of factors intertwined into some uniquely messy tangled ball of string. It looks messy <albeit far too many business consultants portray it as simple, or linear, or anything but tangled as they

straighten the string out to show a flawed construct> and it is … well … messy.

Therefore trying to pull it apart and using one aspect as a “successful foundation for our future success” <see: “formula”> is flawed logic. There are rarely, very rarely, neat & plausible solutions to what a business faces in the here & now. If you are shown a ‘formula for success’ and it looks neat and it seem plausible … it is most likely wrong.

Ok. What I am now going to say is going to sound painfully inefficient.

A business has to create its own way of doing things. It has to create its own formula. It can certainly contain some aspects of things that have been done in the past but those are simply ingredients from which you will build your own formula. And, to be clear, if you start bolting together different formulas to create a successful business … you are simply creating a Frankenstein which the village people are going to end up killing with simple pitchforks & torches.

Your business formula for success will have to be yours. And, yes, you do need some type of formula. Business does demand some order. Without it there is only chaos.

Now. ‘Borrowing’ order <see: “formulas”> seems like a nifty short cut to minimizing risk as well as creating a foundation on which to build upon. Unfortunately, it is often not that simple for a couple of reasons.

<1> Rigidity. Using someone else’s formula is like inserting an immovable part. It is a rigid component inflexible to any organizational adaptations … or external adaptations. Customize the formula and you run the likely risk that it fails <because a successful formula is a formula for a specific need>. Leave the formula rigid and you run the likely risk the organization loses some flexibility to respond to external circumstances.

<2> External adaptations.Because the business environment in which a business competes in is a fairly unorderly world and order constantly chafes with disorder. Formulas in today’s business world look significantly different than formulas of the past in that the past had more rigid aspects and the present has more fluidity.

Anyway. I would like to note that last point as possibly the biggest struggle a business leader has in managing a business – getting comfortable with the constant chafing and recognizing when it is no longer simple chafing and instead a real open wound.

In the end. Let me end where I began … you cannot use someone else’s fire; you can only use your own. And in order to do that, you must first be willing to believe you have it.

Most businesses have their successful formula already in hand. More often than not they don’t need to look elsewhere for a formula. They just cannot see it yet … they cannot see they have their own fire.

That’s what I do.

Painfully, but what I do. Make them see their fire and believe in it. It comes down to assessing the ingredients that reside in the business owner’s mind, in the business culture and what the organization itself is capable of … and building that fire.

And, even then, rarely is there some simple formula which becomes their elixir for success. It becomes almost like the core molecule on which additional molecules can be attached or removed as the business organism interacts with that wacky disorderly business environment.

Success in business is never easy. It only looks easy when looking at someone else from afar or looking to the past. While businesses demand order the business environment conducts itself in a less than orderly fashion. That sentence right there explains why there is no formula for success and that we have a non-formula world.

So many nights wanting morning. Our lust for future comfort is the biggest thief of life. “

=

Joshua Glenn Clark

—

So. I almost called this ‘thief of life.’

And I may yet.

This began as I sat listening to a discussion the other day when I realized that I was just hearing one reason after another being vocalized on why something shouldn’t be done. Ah. Please note … I said “shouldn’t” not “couldn’t.” It was a litany borne of either laziness or fear.

Regardless.

Here is the scary part <at least to me>. It became a numbers game. Numbers as in … even if the one reason ‘to do’ was the right thing to do or, at minimum, at least doing something was better than nothing … the logic seemed to come down to ‘well, if we have all these <100> reasons to not do it … it seems like a bad idea.’

Stop.

Stop right there.

Doing the right thing is not a numbers game. I can always … let me repeat … ALWAYS find reasons to not do something. The main one is “wishing” in that people sit around wishing for something to change that will make the 100 reasons vanish in the blink of an eye and the “one right thing” stands alone in the spotlight of what to do.

—

“The world is not a wish-granting factory.”

Gus <Fault in our Stars>

——————-

But it doesn’t work that way. While I don’t have research on my side <because I am fairly sure no research has ever been done> doing the right thing, or the 1 thing which everyone really knows should be done, almost always seems to have to fight a battle of attrition. One in which you can either get pecked to death by ducks, slowly bleed to death through little slices from sharp simple minded knives, or simply by being bludgeoned over and over again with some blunt dull cumbersome object.

The 1 often seems to need what Lincoln called ‘the full measure of devotion.’

Anyway. The 100 reasons are simply 100 thieves.

They steal life.

They steal honor & integrity.

They steal opportunity.

They steal truth & reason & logic.

The steal it one coin at a time. In the end your pockets are empty.

Look. In most cases and situations … doing something embodies infinite potential … and scarily … infinite possibilities. While we don’t like to admit it in this business world of ‘setting objectives to measure against’ more often a choice … or a decision … can have multiple outcomes.

Yes.

You surely try and herd the choice into the direction and path you desire. That’s kind of what managing a decision is all about. But that is managing movement. Conversely, the ‘100 reasons to not do’ are managing stagnancy. Or ‘non decisions.

—————

“Every moment has infinite potential.

Every new moment contains for you possibilities that you can’t possibly imagine.

Every day is a blank page that you could fill with the most beautiful drawings. “

John C. Parkin

————

I find this whole ‘let’s come up with 100 reasons so we do not have to do the one thing we should do’ slightly puzzling for a couple of reasons.

Puzzling in that possibilities are exciting and, in general, people like the concept of possibilities. Possibiliies represent hope. And, yes, they are scary <because they are … well … possibilities … not guarantees or promises>.

But. I imagine I am puzzled because if I put ‘possibility’ on a scale, I am fairly sure it weighs more than ‘not a promise.’ And I understand that a sliver of fear carries a disproportionate weight to its size, but I still sense that in most people’s minds possibility is a joyful burden.

Next.

Puzzling in that society has embraced ‘simplicity’ like it is a long lost son. Well. Let me say its embraced simplicity & efficiency <to the detriment of all other children society may have>. I say that because the 100 reasons takes a lot of work to come up with and they are complex <when the list is complete> and time consuming to think up and list. Its puzzling we invest so much energy in the 100 when the 1 most likely represents the simplest & more efficient.

It gets even more puzzling especially when examining the fact that “1”, which even if debatable, almost always carries a thread of ‘I want to do this’ within everyone. And that implies organizational or ‘crowd’ alignment in some form or fashion and that ultimately begets <or translates into> some variation of efficiency. Its puzling because on the other hand, the 100, the doubts, vary from individual to individual.

Anyway.

Suffice it to say.

In order to do something … to get shit done … you cannot let the 100 beat the 1. Doing something … or making a decision to do something … is not a numbers game. Just because you can come up with a 100 reasons on why to not do something … if the 1 is right … that is enough.

The 1 outweighs the 100.

Maybe that is the issue. In the measurement world we live in this math doesn’t make sense. I mean, c’mon, how could 1 outweigh 100?

Well.

Doing the 1 thing that should be done always makes sense and I venture to say it will carry much greater weight as an impact.

I believe we need to spend more time these days discussing value creation before we begin talking about, well, anything else. I believe this for three reasons:

Today, it’s often about efficiency. Or minimizing to maximize. Minimize what to put in and then how creatively you craft the features. We should remember production is more about economical/efficient input and selling is more about thoughtful ideation. Regardless. I believe we need to talk more about maximizing without just talking about efficiency.

I worry we talk about “things” because they seem like the right thing to do, not because they will add value <based on our vision/mission>. I worry we don’t talk more, and understand better, about what value we provide people. Oh. A business typically knows what they see as value provided, but very rarely turn the telescope and see what value a possible customer desires <or receives>. I worry we don’t talk more about value creation.

Unless everyone wants to enter into a race to commodity business needs to start engaging in an effectiveness discussion. Efficiency is inherently about attempting to provide value by stripping away obstacles or the unnecessary. Effectiveness is inherently about persuading people some things are actually necessary for quality, enjoyment or substance to meet your outlay of investment (cash).

I would begin with the fact we know there is a relationship between velocity & value creation. As I noted in ‘obsession with velocity’, velocity is always about decisions. What I mean by that is there is never any lack of things to do in a business, but some just aren’t worth doing.

Make your project decisions wisely. Velocity is all that matters not only because it guarantees progress, rather than simple “hamster in a wheel” speed, but it also inherently gravitates toward value creation.

Regardless.

Value creation comes in two basic constructs: structural and transactional and revolves around efficiency and effectiveness.

Here you go. Just ponder.

efficiency and effectiveness

All value begins, and ends, with efficacy or the balance between efficiency & effectiveness. Many people when viewing his grid for the first time ask who would ever want to (a) be in the lower left hand quadrant or (b) be below the line at all.

Many business, and specific products, live & die off of efficiency. There is nothing wrong with that. In addition, a low cost provider will care less about effectiveness because their inherent ‘value’ is found in cheapest. I would argue everyone wants some balance but there will always be at least one incredibly efficient, not as effective, business and there will always be at least one incredibly effective business where efficiency is just not that important. Similarly, I could argue a business in & of itself can have all of these things within their business and the collection of them all make up the larger value creation offering.

Regardless. Look for your unique balance and, well, choose wisely.

structural value creation

This is the x axis. Efficiency to left effective to right.

Structural value can be generated through efficiency or effectiveness. Efficiency means your structural change reduces costs (tangibly or intangibly like time). Effectiveness means your structural change increases value to a point that increases price or offer opportunities for premium transactions/offers.

For example, adding 5G in a city is a structural value creation. It lifts everything to a higher value. Digital transformation is also. It’s an infrastructure change which provides structural value creation.

In addition. A structural value creation may, or may not additionally offer specific transactional value creation situations. What this means is incremental value for a specific transaction over and above the basic structural value creation.

From an efficiency standpoint these could be things like frictionless engagement, speed, or any improvement which increases convenience or ease of use.

From an effectiveness standpoint these would be things which increase quality of actual transaction. Better products, more effective outcomes, etc.

For example. You could create a video platform, or an AI platform (to show traditional and technology) which enhances a specific transaction to a point in which you could create value (additional sales) or simply charge a higher price.

Value Proposition vs. Employee Value Proposition

Once identifying the value creation one offers a business you develop a value proposition ( a way to communicate what value you create). I would suggest this is an exercise not just for customers but also as a hiring criteria. You want to attract customers who desire what value you offer and you would like to hire people who contribute to your value creation proposition.

In its simplest terms, a value proposition is a positioning statement that explains what benefit you provide for who and what effective/efficient way you do it. Your value proposition isn’t meant to appeal to everyone, but it should have a value appeal of some distinction (not necessarily differentiation).

Lastly.

Now that maybe I’ve given you some things to ponder let me say, frankly, we don’t speak often enough about value creation dynamics within organizational modeling & business construct. Value creation, at its core, is all about people – what they do as well as what they think. Huh? When an individual feels like they are doing something of value & their value can be maximized, the organizational value creation inevitably is maximized. I would argue if you focus on the value-creation-structure the people will believe they are part of value creation and the formal structure will either fall in place or will be simpler to match up to how the value is created.

That’s it.

Value creation. I just don’t see how any business can have an effective vision or mission if they haven’t gone through this exercise. If you don’t have this conversation and go through the rigor, well, it seems like you run a major risk you will not get what you deserve – revenue, profit, customers or even employees.

“Beyond a doubt truth bears the same relation to falsehood as light to darkness.”

–

Leonardo da Vinci

=================

59squared.

3,481.

3481squared.

12,117,361.

12,117,361squared.

1.5 billion.

That’s three degrees and I am at almost 1/5th of the entire world. Yeah. The numbers are really not that neat, but you get the point. With a single event, a single death, one person can set off a chain of events that will affect hundreds of thousands, millions and even billions of people.

Some people call this “6 degrees of separation” <although I showed it to you as only 3>. I didn’t make up the squared concept. In some form or fashion it reflects the truth of the internet of things and connectedness and it shows the likelihood that the majority of us have some connection to any event in which 5, 59 or 559 people are part of.

I say this because it makes a lot of things, well, personal. The main point here is that a person now has access and is aware of more people <true friends as well as web based friends> and can have more frequent communication due to the ‘digital revolution’.

Yet.

Social media is simply the fact that the traditional benefits of an acquaintance network <personal or professional> and friendships can be more expansively realized than before <it amplifies>. This means that truth resounds more quickly & clearly & bluntly than ever before. The other truth is that our own experiences, and Life, can then be at the mercy of crowds of friends & acquaintances — crowds providing unsolicited input & feedback & experiences all influencing hordes of additional people’s thoughts on a daily basis. This means whether you are present in one place, or not, you can be impacted in the present place you stand. You are a nomad in which the world remains your home.

Our world is now one large network consisting of two basic things – people and connections. And while many times we look at this as some forced or constructed network <Facebook, twitter, etc. provides hubs and constructs> the reality is that most people networks & connections are organically constructed. So while we like to draw out nice symmetrical shapes to define how connections work and networks are constructed the reality is that networks are more often not symmetrical.

The unique patterns in the connections determine the shapes. We reach out in asymmetrical ways to places, events and thoughts and bring them near in seconds. In addition the ties between the connections can be complicated – spanning from intense or passive.

In the business world we try to characterize networks and connections in a variety of ways. The trouble is that people are not that orderly and certainly not stagnant and they actively reshape their connections, interests and networks all the time.

But I am not here to discuss how the internet can, or cannot, affect personal relationships or a sense of individual isolation but rather this is a thought on how the internet can make things, and Life … well … smaller.

On most days the ‘quasi-truth’ that resounds in the echo chambers of what we talk about and ‘think we know’ is that the internet is isolating us … disconnects us from reality and social interaction.

So … is it possible that the internet increases connection and decreases connection at exactly the same time? Yup. The Internet connects and it isolates.

The usual assumption that most of us make about our computing and communication environment is that we are ‘always’ connected. Indeed, most of us are ‘nomads’ when it comes to computing and communications. We live in a disconnected world much of the time as we travel between our office, home, airport, hotel, car, coffee shop, bedroom, etc. We now recognize that access to computing and communications is necessary not only from one’s `home base’, but also while one is in transit and/or when one reaches one’s destination.

It is an anytime, anywhere access world. It is also, paradoxically, a ‘be anywhere at any time’ world.

That is the connected aspect which creates the whole disconnected aspect.

Well. Let’s just say we feel slightly disconnected in a connected way, of course, until something happens that tightens all the lines of connection.

It is within moments like that where the supposed 6 degrees of separation becomes less degrees and more links all of a sudden the 59squared aspect of connectedness occurs.

The world gets smaller … in fact … really fucking small.

We are brought together and something that happens to 5 people, maybe 59 people, or even 559 people, becomes an experience within our own grasp.

Which brings me back to truth and resounding.

The majority of our social networking constructs today are on the internet <or have a foundation on the internet>. Simplistically, we, the people, are connecting via the internet. What this means is that the internet muffles or amplifies our voices, events and truth <as well as lies unfortunately>.

What this means is that … well … an event, a moment, a death, an injury, resounds … resounds as in 59squared.

What THAT means is we have to face a truth whether we want to or not. Now. At that point we have a choice – see what we face or don’t see what we face. And if we refuse to face it we will remain disconnectedly connected in our little asymmetrical networks of friends & acquaintances.

That was a sad sentence to type.

At this point, my conclusion, I imagine it may be relevant to remind everyone of 59squared and the fact that I can do one thing, one right thing … or one wrong thing … and it will resound.

“Any system of ethics must account for scarcity. If it doesn’t, humanity would perish due to misallocation of finite resources, including one’s own body.”

—-

Daniel Alexander Brackins

===============

“If somebody never gets enough of you, they will always want more”

―

Ashly Lorenzana

==================

I recently was asked to help a Brazilian design & brand consulting company expanding their business into the United State after they read my thoughts on Velocity in business (in particular my thoughts on the Velocity Zone).

It was a fascinating discussion in which I was, once again, reminded of the attitudinal differences between the United States and other countries.

While a Brazilian attitude with regard to how their work should come to life (a stronger attitude with regard to vividness & distinction) in this case it came down to abundance versus scarcity. I often found myself sitting back just thinking about how Brazil viewed the world thru a scarcity lens. It had a sense of urgency with regard to not just ‘use it or lose it’ but rather ‘if I don’t use it I will not survive.’And that is where I gained my deepest insight – survival. In an abundant world survival may not be accepted as a fait accompli, but it certainly feels like it is more likely. In a scarcity world you almost feel like survival is a moment by moment aspect of life. This isn’t to suggest desperation but it does suggest two things:

Enjoy the moments you have and maximize them (this comes to life in a business attitude of distinctness, boldness & distinction)

Not fear of death but more aggressiveness in the momentto survive (this comes to life with grabbing what exists now rather than thinking something better may come along tomorrow)

Anyway.

It led to Velo. It’s a Portuguese spin on Velocity.

About Velo

We made up this word because, to us, its meaning is new. Velo is velocity with a Brazilian twist. Let’s call it the Portuguese version of Velocity.

We arrived at the term because we believe America business view is tainted by the concept of abundance – an abundance of opportunities, resources & money. It doesn’t mean all businesses actual have an abundance of money & resources just that in the back of their minds they believe America is abundant therefore attitudinally they don’t approach things through a scarcity lens. This affects decision making, strategic approaches, brand positioning and messaging, design , messaging and even budget allocation.

Abundance versus scarcity attitude

In an abundant world options are limitless, in other words, miss an opportunity and another will arise. Let’s call this a “limitless supply of water” attitude. Water is abundant so when presented with a glass of it unless I’m desperately thirsty it’s just a glass of water. In a scarcity world a glass of water can mean life or death.

Now. In America we talk scarcity, but think abundance. This ‘abundance of options’ attitude affects not only our general attitude but also behavioral decisions – business decisions. We sift thru options with a slight lack of urgency. In Brazil one cannot simply talk scarcity but act upon it to insure you get your glass of water. Options are limited and you maximize the ones you do have.

We think of velocity in the same terms. Velocity is a scarce resource and demands a versatile view of communications, design, branding combined with a bold view on crafting a distinctive idea & brand. Velocity falters under an abundance attitude and can quickly become just speed – hamsters on a wheel in an abundant world. Velocity thrives within a scarcity attitude by assembling minimal viable teams with minimal viable products utilizing minimal viable assets & resources applying communications principles & thinking to maximize opportunities as scarce moments in time. That’s a mouthful but suffice it to say Velocity thrives in a minimalist view.

Comunicação and scarcity

Comunicação is a little different than America communication. It’s a little bit bolder and distinct (remember, resources, including time & money are viewed as scarce therefore need to be maximized). The design has more vividness. The strategy is a little more bold. The branding is more distinct. The communications have a little more edge. Generally speaking the ideas are treated as a scarce resource not to be wasted with ‘safe’ thinking & doing, but rather vivid thinking that demands people pay attention.

Criatividade and scarcity

Criatividade is a little different than American creativity. In a scarcity world everyone is expected to be creative (remember, resources are scare therefore need to be maximized) therefore creativity comes to life from unexpected places in unexpected ways. There are no thinkers and doers in a scarcity Criatividade world, just doers who think & thinkers who do – all the time. Creativity is only abundant if you maximize the scarce resources at hand.

In an abundant world options seem limitless and discussion can actually be infinite all of which just ends with a less creative ‘safer’ solution. In a scarcity driven world options are treated as limited so discussion is finite with bolder, more vivid, creative solutions.

Think: Value on the Move

The essence of Velo is enabling value transactions to happen as effectively and efficiently as possible. By treating the world thru a scarcity lens we maximize time, resources, minds & skills to generate brand velocity.